Leading into uncertain futures: building scenarios for educational leadership planning

Mr Adrian Montana Vermont Secondary College Victoria, Australia

The student of 2030 has just been dialoguing with peers in Rajasthan, India. They have exchanged artworks via the internet; Indian miniatures and painting of their friends. Click! This has been a week of cultural exchanges, including dance and drama workshops and a combined closing performance staged live via satellite. Students of differing ages worked together, the more experienced mentoring and guiding others through the process. Now, each child develops their personalised learning program with their teacher, taking into account preferred learning styles. In individual and small group tutorials, online learning, video conferencing or email links, students have been experiencing Indian culture. Outcomes have been unpredictable and the project has resulted in song writing board games based on the Indian epic ‘The Mahabharata’, astronomy and mathematical calculus activities.

The Indian community has been firmly behind this one, offering intellectual capital as well as monetary support through their extensive local and international networks. Their involvement has been exhilarating for the staff. Together with the primary and secondary teachers and students who have been planning this, the community has shared their knowledge, addressed problems and pooled resources. A council of leaders distributed across the network has developed strategic direction.
(A possible futures scenario, Adrian Montana, March 2006)

Introduction

This paper examines some of the implications for school leaders that arise from important scenario projects in England and Europe (OECD 2001; European journal of teacher education, 2003). The paper highlights a tension that exists between projected ‘free-market, individualistic’ scenarios that aim to commercialise educational provision and what I will call ‘moral purpose’ scenarios, which value the learner as part of a community. This paper considers some of the projected future scenarios and their ramifications for school leadership.

Part A: spies from the future

Scenario planning has its beginnings in military strategic thinking. Big business then adopted scenario thinking and used it as a planning technique. Recent European and English scenario projects (OECD 2001; European journal of teacher education, 2003) have provided diverse possibilities for school education in 2020. Underlying all scenario projects is the understanding that in some way future outcomes will be based on current trends. A question to ask is: ‘If this current trend continues, what is its likely outcome?’ As Newby (2005B: 253) puts it, ‘The unknown future comes out of the known present’. Scenario thinking also allows us to think of the unexpected. In scenario building, open questions, such as he following, are used as a technique for framing our thoughts.

• Over the past three to five years, have there been any events or issues that have come as a complete surprise to you in the teaching profession? List up to three of these.
• Step back and think about the big picture over the next one to five years, locally, regionally or nationally. What are three to five things happening now in the larger environment have the potential to make a major difference in the next 15-25 years?
• If you were looking back on your time, what lasting contribution do you hope to make to the teaching profession?
• What critical decisions have to be made soon? What forks in the road are coming up?
• What core values would you like to see driving the development of teaching into the future?
• In thinking about teaching, are there any pieces of infrastructure that seem to be missing?

Forces that will shape our future are powerful. They are already with us and come from a range of sources including governments, parents, global economies, changes in society, advances in medicine and technology and our own sense of security and wellbeing.

Just as the leadership group of Shell adopted scenario thinking in the late 1960s in order to guide them through turbulent times, the OECD adopted this model to assess alternative visions of  ‘schooling for tomorrow’. Invited in 1996 by the OECD Ministers of Education, this was the first time scenario thinking had been applied to education. The invitation led to the Schooling for Tomorrow project in 1997, a major international OECD/Netherlands conference in 2000 and the publication of an influential 2001 report titled, What schools for the future? (OECD 2001).

The OECD Schooling for Tomorrow scenarios combined different elements – trends, plausible inter-relationships between clusters of variables and guiding policy ideas. The scenarios were constructed in a 15 to 20-year timeframe, which is long enough for significant change to occur beyond the immediate political cycles. Six scenarios were presented in the report (OECD 2001: 77-98).

• Scenario 1: The ‘status quo’ extrapolated. A robust bureaucratic school system with vested interests that resist fundamental change. There is a continuing problem of school image and resourcing.
• Scenario 2: Extending the market model. Widespread dissatisfaction leads to reshaping public funding and school systems. There is a rapid growth of demand-driven ‘market currencies’ indicators and accreditation. There is a greater diversity of providers and professionals and greater inequity.
• Scenario 3: Re-schooling. There are high levels of public trust and funding. Schools are the centre of community and social capital formation. There is greater organisational/professional diversity, greater social equity.
• Scenario 4: Schools as focused learning organisations. There is high level of public trust and funding. Teachers network widely. Schools uphold equity and quality.
• Scenario 5: De-schooling. There is a widespread dissatisfaction with schools and the system. The learner uses ICT networks. Communities of interest develop. Potentially serious equity problems.
• Scenario 6: Teacher exodus. A severe teacher shortage leads to a drop in standards, despite concerted policy measures.

 The scenarios offered by the OECD report are not polished final statements about the future but are starting points for dialogue and engagement. Scenario 3 ‘Re-schooling’ received the greatest endorsement from OECD members. It was thought that Scenario 2 will present many challenges, particularly for cash strapped schools systems. Scenario 1 was an undesirable scenario but a very probable one.

Issues from the Schooling for the Future and the Teaching 2020 scenarios

 Some will find the story told in future scenarios alarming, others exciting and attractive. Whatever your response, they should compel attention for, if we do not begin to look ahead, the future will come upon us unawares. As Newby (2005:255) argues, ‘Knowing it – at least, surmising in an intelligent way about it – positions us to be ready when it comes’. The greatest forces bringing pressure to bear on education systems include the following.

Governments and nationhood

Globalisation is the biggest force on school education today. With the growing globalisation of economies, culture and technological and scientific advances, the notion of nationhood is coming under pressure. In response, we are experiencing resistance of small nation states that struggle to hold on to their ethnic identities. On the other hand, western values and material culture is becoming increasingly ubiquitous.

• Global economies are changing the nature of employment. The ‘world of work’ for which we are preparing students is in no way like the ‘world of work’ of 50 years ago. Globalisation has fundamentally changed working life.
• Technology. Advances in technology have exploded in the last 12 years. The technology young people use to communicate has fundamentally changed the way young people communicate. This rate of change is having a serious impact of notion of schooling as a localized, isolated entity.
• A changing society. In western and developing nations, the rise in access to material goods has changed the role of women as the primary homemaker. Women’s roles have changed as greater numbers have entered the workforce.

Implications and challenges from these reports for education leaders

I now wish to consider some of the implications and challenges that educational leaders may face as a consequence of changing education conditions.

The value of schools needs to be stressed to the school community. A number of scenarios forecast the death of schools (Newby 2005B: 253; OECD 2001:91). In a knowledge rich environment, where ICT makes it possible to have an education from anywhere, anytime, school may be one social formation that becomes redundant. Without leaders who articulate the value of schools as organisations, their existence may be under threat. Exactly what values a school leader should articulate can vary but must include the following.

• The importance of the school environment in forming healthy student relations. School is a place where young people can meet and make friends and experience rich social interactions without fear.
• The importance of schools in developing an awareness and respect of civic responsibilities. These are developed through such things as ‘clean up’ campaigns, public speaking, student representation on school committees, and so on.
• The importance of schools in fostering healthy practices, such as eating, exercising and resting well.

Principals will need to recast learning for its moral, cultural and human significance and to reframe teaching as a professional covenant. They will need to ensure that their schools reinforce the learning of appropriate physical, social and societal values and that the community knows why these things are so important and why they could not be achieved through online learning at home.

The future of the school, the teacher and the principal is not a given. The old critique put forward by Hargreaves (1994:23) that gifted teachers do not necessarily make good managers may re-raise the notion of the separation of management from teachers. In the future, a principal (teacher) may remain just that - a senior consultant and leader to other teachers - while a school may be managed by someone from a different background.

There are a small but growing number of writers who are beginning to discuss the changing role and purpose of leadership (Gronn, 2003). In his book, the New work of educational leaders, Peter Gronn (2003) outlines the value and importance of distributed leadership in workplaces where there is an increased demand and complexity placed on the tasks of the principal. The notion of a single leader, Gronn (2003: 27) argues, is now challenged as it gives rise to a redundant sense of dependency. The notion of the school principal as the hero-leader seems to be weakened, ‘with increasing numbers of mentions of distributed leadership appearing in the literature’ (Gronn 2003: 155). The leader in the changing workplace allows everyone in the leadership group the opportunity to ‘exercise leadership, singly or in combination’ (Gronn 2003: 49).

Teams and teamwork are becoming more common in schools. In light of the current importance of achieving workplace synergies, particularly over multi-campus or large school environments, effective teamwork is essential. As the value of all sorts of school networks is more deeply understood by schools, leaders and leadership groups will be working, more commonly, across primary/secondary/tertiary and public/ private sectors. Leaders will need to think and network globally, as well as locally.

In the oceans of knowledge, the traditional curriculum is dead! Long live the curriculum! School leaders will also need to emphasise and inform their communities of the value and centrality of pedagogical principles over the regurgitation of facts and figures. An emphasis should be put on metacognition and students’ learning about their own learning styles.

The ‘sacred cows’ of education that are being challenged are:

• the dominance of a set body of knowledge as the centre of school learning
• the unitisation of the school day into 50-minute periods.
• centralised, top-down control – traditional leadership manifestations
• resourcing - the role and job of the teacher will change dramatically.

Schools will be part of a greater community network.
Effective school leadership is vital in adapting to, and steering, changes. Old school paradigms are being challenged and this will increasingly challenge school leaders to be managers of change and to act as transformational leaders.

Commercialisation of education services. Over the coming 25 years, school education will have to face strong arguments for the commercialisation of education products and services. It is envisaged that strong pressure will be put on schools to adopt more commercial practices and to purchase products that fundamentally take ownership of areas of curriculum and teaching and learning that currently teachers control. As government efficiencies mean less money is spent on educational infrastructure, school leaders will need to seek partnerships with different sectors in the school community. This will provide a challenge, as school leaders will need highly developed negotiating skills

School resources networked, their social service roles extended and shared with the wider community. Public opinion and parent lobbying will continue to have a big impact on educational futures (Hargreaves 1994:14). In 2030, will schools still share a function with prisons and hospitals, namely to keep young people off the streets, out of harm and out of sight? Most parents may still be too busy to have time or resources to educate the young in their homes. The school, or something like it, is likely to survive until other ways of meeting the custodial function are found. A stronger social welfare role may also be expected of schools. There is a strong chance that school sites will provide multi-access to a range of community services. Who would manage these complexes, and how? Schools must continue to act as social anchors and safe havens, where students can learn in a peaceful, harmonious and safe environment.  On the other hand, some scenario thinkers suggest that schools may close altogether. Education, as with other fields, may become an individually consumed service. Governments, for political reasons, may still be obliged to subsidise personal education trainers, but, such subsidies may seem more economical given there are no buildings, offices or teacher salaries to maintain.

This ‘no school’ scenario raises arguments about the value of schools in developing the whole human, including physical, social and civic maturation. The question remains: ‘If schools are not the best environment for this to take place, then what environment is?’

In the 21st century, it is not just a matter of asking: ‘What is it that we want young people to know and be able to do?’ Our job as teachers is to help young people do well in life, not just school. The essential core understandings are about transcendent values and transferable skills that will equip them for a life of dignity and integrity. McGhie and Barr (2000: 58)argue that ‘the future is not a monolith that awaits us all’. While educated guesses are possible as to the trends that are likely to take effect and the contexts in which we will all have to lead our lives, the basic human questions will remain: What is the nature and purpose of human existence? How do we make and sustain relationships with others? What can we make of our lives? How do we deal with our emotions? 

Education in the 21st century, above all else, must sustain the capacity to wonder and invent, to engage with change and to live happily with it.

Conclusion

Scenario thinking is highly relevant for education reform today and can have valuable spin-offs for the development of education policy and strategic direction-setting. No matter which scenarios prevail, I argue that school leaders must respond to these pressures without losing sight of the primary purpose of their school. As Michael Fullan (1992: 9) points out, ‘Principals considering a particular change face two questions. First, ‘will students benefit if the changes are made?’ Second, ‘if teachers resist, is the potential loss of goodwill and influence on teachers worth the risk?’ It is clear that school leaders must be skilled to lead staff through change. This may not be easy to do, as Hargreaves (1994: 12) points out, ‘ the main barrier to change may be the professional culture of teachers and the nature of school and classroom organisation… Professional and institutional structures and cultures are resilient; they withstand many an assault and have powerful capacities to maintain and reproduce themselves despite surface changes’.  All of the future scenarios suggest that leaders must be ready to lead change, as, by implication, it will be their inertia that spells the redundancy of school education.

References

Fullan, M. What’s worth fighting for in headship? 1992.
Open University Press, UK.
Gronn, P. The new work of educational leaders. 2003. SAGE publications, London.
Hargreaves, D. The mosaic of learning: schools and teachers for the next century. 1994. Demos Paper No. 8, London.
McGhie, M, Barr, I. ‘Curriculum for the future.’ In Watkins, C, Lodge, C, Best, B (eds) Tomorrow’s schools – towards integrity, 2000. Routledge/Farmer, London.
Newby, M ‘Looking to the Future’. In Journal of education for teaching: international research and pedagogy. Vol. 31, Number 4/Nov. 2005, p. 253.
OECD. Schooling for tomorrow: what schools for the future? 2001. Paris: OECD.
European journal of teacher education. Vol. 26, No 1, 2003.
(Special issue responds to trends in teacher education in England using the 2003 Teacher Training Agency scenario project ITE Futures project/Teaching 2020).
Journal of education for teaching: international research and pedagogy. Vol. 31, Number 4/Nov. 2005.  (Special issue on the 2001Association for Teacher Education in Europe-RDC19 scenarios project).